Clarification on Anarch Revolt and D action bleed.
Walter Denny
has practically the same writing. This came up in a game.
Secondly, and I believe I am wrong, however I remember that a D action bleed
could go to any Methuselah. However I heard now, that this is only true if
the card specifically states that you can.
LSJ
> Is Anarach Revolt cumulative?
Yes.
> I no Army of Rats is not and Anarch Revolt
> has practically the same writing. This came up in a game.
Army of Rats has different writing: "You may only burn 1 pool
each turn with Army of Rats cards."
> Secondly, and I believe I am wrong, however I remember that a
> D action bleed could go to any Methuselah. However I heard now,
> that this is only true if the card specifically states that you
> can.
See 6.1.1 and 6.1.6 of the rules
--
LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) VTES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc.
Links to revised rulebook, rulings, errata, and tournament rules:
http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Dorian
<Walter...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Is Anarach Revolt cumulative? I no Army of Rats is not and Anarch Revolt
>has practically the same writing. This came up in a game.
Anarch is cumulative (last i checked), why the ruling is different
from army of rats, i do not know.
>
>Secondly, and I believe I am wrong, however I remember that a D action bleed
>could go to any Methuselah. However I heard now, that this is only true if
>the card specifically states that you can.
>
>
The D on the D action bleed cards is remonder text, not text
overruling any rules.
Joshua Duffin
Dorian <bond...@home.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Dec 2000 08:11:51 GMT, "Walter Denny"
> <Walter...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Is Anarach Revolt cumulative? I no Army of Rats is not and Anarch
Revolt
> >has practically the same writing. This came up in a game.
>
> Anarch is cumulative (last i checked), why the ruling is different
> from army of rats, i do not know.
It's different from Army of Rats because the Rats were errataed
to be non-cumulative early in the life of the game (November
1994). As (originally) written, Army of Rats was cumulative just
like Anarch Revolt. But not any more.
> >Secondly, and I believe I am wrong, however I remember that a D
action bleed
> >could go to any Methuselah. However I heard now, that this is only
true if
> >the card specifically states that you can.
>
> The D on the D action bleed cards is remonder text, not text
> overruling any rules.
Exactly right (as LSJ was indicating with the references to
the Sabbat War rulebook).
Josh
not a rules authority but knows where to find the rulings
(http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/rulings.html)
Walter Denny
on there to indicate that the action could be directed anywhere. Just a
sanity check, make sure I'm not going crazy.
Derek Ray
<Walter...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Am I correct that this a change to the rules. That originally the D was put
>on there to indicate that the action could be directed anywhere. Just a
>sanity check, make sure I'm not going crazy.
This is a change to a CHANGE to the rules, to be precise.
ORIGINALLY the (D) was on the cards as reminder text, to indicate who
could block.
A previous Rules Team changed the meaning of (D) to indicate who could
be targetted as well.
The current Rules Team changed it back. So yes, at one point, (D)
bleed cards could target anyone. This is no longer the case.
-- Derek
Jack-Booted Thug of Atlanta
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge."
- C. Darwin, 1871
LSJ
> Am I correct that this a change to the rules. That originally the D
> was put on there to indicate that the action could be directed
> anywhere. Just a sanity check, make sure I'm not going crazy.
There used to be errata to the rules that said that a (D) symbol
somehow extended the list of available targets (but only in the
case of bleed actions - not, for example, for a action to burn
the Army of Rats).
But that errata has been discarded.